Comically Misleading?

[Piratz]

I don't have the content as I don't subscribe to ESPN's pay articles, but something Lunardi has written has the Pirates lumped into it with the headline of our 13-4 record being "comically misleading" or something.

We have a 3-2 road record featuring a win at #12. Not sure what it is about.


http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...d-bracket-joe-lunardi-importance-winning-road

 

[Halldan1]

Another scheduling pet peeve is the extraordinary number of wins piled up by mostly power conference teams in the nonleague portion of the season. Now I understand the practice of "buying" games is almost as old as the sport itself.

However, nothing says that I have to believe win-loss records that are so inflated as to be almost comically misleading. So, for kicks, I like to subtract sub-200 home court victories for schools that load up excessively with "buy" games that are little more than glorified practices.

You know who you are ...


Inflating the records

TEAM ACTUAL W-L EFFECTIVE DIFF

Marquette 12-6 (.667) 4-6 (.400) .267
Kansas State 11-6 (.647) 5-6 (.455) .198
Syracuse 12-7 (.632) 6-7 (.462) .170
Clemson 12-6 (.667) 6-6 (.500) .167
Connecticut 12-5 (.709) 6-5 (.545) .164
Michigan 13-5 (.722) 7-5 (.583) .139
Boise State 13-5 (.722) 7-5 (.583) .139
Ohio State 12-7 (.632) 7-7 (.500) .132
Utah 12-5 (.709) 7-5 (.583) .126
Northwestern 15-4 (.789) 8-4 (.667) .122
Baylor 14-3 (.824) 7-3 (.700) .124
Evansville 16-3 (.842) 8-3 (.727) .115
Cincinnati 13-6 (.684) 8-6 (.571) .113
Saint Mary's 15-2 (.882) 7-2 (.778) .104
Colorado 13-4 (.765) 8-4 (.667) .098

Seton Hall 13-4 (.765) 8-4 (.667) .098

Gonzaga 14-4 (.778) 9-4 (.692) .086
Texas-Arlington 13-3 (.813) 8-3 (.727) .086
Louisville 14-3 (.824) 9-3 (.750) .074
Maryland 16-2 (.889) 9-2 (.818) .071
Purdue 15-3 (.833) 10-3 (.769) .064
Southern Cal 15-3 (.833) 10-3 (.769) .064
Indiana 15-3 (.833) 10-3 (.769) .064
Davidson 11-5 (.688) 8-5 (.615) .063
Pittsburgh 15-2 (.882) 10-2 (.833) .049

 

[Halldan1]

Fri Nov 13 82 232 Dartmouth W, 84-67 75 Home 1-0

Sun Nov 15 73 214 Wagner W, 69-59 73 Home 2-0

Thu Nov 19 77 115 Long Beach St. L, 80-77 71 Neutral 2-1

Fri Nov 20 89 341 Bradley W, 67-59 68 Neutral 3-1

Sun Nov 22 91 102 Mississippi W, 75-63 66 Neutral 4-1

Sat Nov 28 80 86 Georgia W, 69-62 64 Home 5-1

Wed Dec 2 70 63 George Washington L, 72-64 67 Away 5-2

Sat Dec 5 70 280 Rutgers W, 84-55 72 Away 6-2

Thu Dec 10 52 248 Troy W, 78-69 71 Home 7-2

Sun Dec 13 60 187 Saint Peter's W, 72-46 64 Home 8-2

Sat Dec 19 54 23 Wichita St. W, 80-76 78 OT Home 9-2

Tue Dec 22 49 293 South Florida W, 66-49 62 Home 10-2

Played 7 homes games.

 

[Bud Boomer]

He's right in the sense that 6 or 7 of our wins are essentially meaningless. 200+ RPI wins make the record look nice, but they don't say much about your team. That said, our guys have answered the bell (so far -- long way to go) against real competition also.

 

[Piratz]

There have been plenty of seasons when this "comically misleading" argument made more sense. The best example is probably that 2012-13 season when we started 12-2 and ended up 15-18. We took up residency in Creampuff City to get to those wins.

But this year is different. This team has already won at Providence (RPI #30, KP #46) and beat Wichita State (RPI #38, KP #23).

I think the wins over Ole Miss (RPI #76, KP #102) and Georgia (RPI #74, KP #86) will probably be solid by season's end as well.

 

[Shuathelete]

Whatever. Lunardi sucks and anyone who follows basketball closely knows it.

 

[Vegas pj]

Whatever. Lunardi sucks and anyone who follows basketball closely knows it.

Yet every year he picks virtually all the teams that make the tourney. Not many, if any, have consistently done that.

 

[Bud Boomer]

Yet every year he picks virtually all the teams that make the tourney. Not many, if any, have consistently done that.

Is picking virtually every team in the tourney really all that impressive? In a given year, there are like 4-6 spots in dispute. I saw a bracketologist ranking at some point, and I think Lunardi was somewhere in the middle of the pack. Behind like two dozen guys picking brackets from their couch.

 

[Shuathelete]

Is picking virtually every team in the tourney really all that impressive? In a given year, there are like 4-6 spots in dispute. I saw a bracketologist ranking at some point, and I think Lunardi was somewhere in the middle of the pack. Behind like two dozen guys picking brackets from their couch.

Yup hes middle of the road if not bottom half. Hes just more dead weight in the ESPN pile of crap.

 

[lloyde dobler]

He picks all the teams that make the tournament, but that's based on his projections on Sunday afternoon of selection day. Most people can do that.

 

[Vegas pj]

Is picking virtually every team in the tourney really all that impressive? In a given year, there are like 4-6 spots

He picks all the teams that make the tournament, but that's based on his projections on Sunday afternoon of selection day. Most people can do that.

i could ave swore he tracks them all season, but that must be someone else I'm was thinking about. Wow, the hate shown on this board is something else.

 

[seton1996]

i could ave swore he tracks them all season, but that must be someone else I'm was thinking about. Wow, the hate shown on this board is something else.

He tracks them all season, but he changes the teams constantly, including all the way up to selection Sunday. As others said, in most years it is pretty obvious who 60+ teams are going to be, so he has to pick the last 5 out of a group of 8-10 teams, and he (and most others) never selects the complete group correctly.

What would be interesting is to see his first set of picks in say November do against the actual teams selected.

 

[sami]

but that's natural, as teams that look to be in early January understandably change... bracketology is all useless chatter.

Jerry Palm is very good at hitting the seeding, which is interesting the few days before. The field of 68 is relatively clear, but the seeds move based on conferences, in year matchups, regions and other factors that make it more respectable to be close.

 

[Piratz]

What would be interesting is to see his first set of picks in say November do against the actual teams selected.

Then that would make him more of a basketball expert than a "bracketologist".

 

[hbkmyr]

This should show picks from November...

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology/_/iteration/134

 

[Shuathelete]

i could ave swore he tracks them all season, but that must be someone else I'm was thinking about. Wow, the hate shown on this board is something else.

Thats because hes riding on the cushiest job this side of Barry Melrose.

 

[sami]

Thats because hes riding on the cushiest job this side of Barry Melrose.

He's getting by on the diversity slate... they needed a dude with long hair and a funny accent.

 

[Vegas pj]

Thats because hes riding on the cushiest job this side of Barry Melrose.

That may be. He's an employee of St. Joseph's and, I believe, was the first person to use "bracketology" or at least make it famous. So shoot the messenger because he's on ESPN. (Ed. Note - my former firm was the general counsel to the original ESPN started by our client Bill Rasmussen) BTW their talking heads except for Bob Ley & Mike & Mike are insufferable.

 

[Piratz]

My favorite is the notorious last minute changes on teams he has in early in the day on Selection Sunday and then nonsensical explanations.

 

[sami]

My favorite is the notorious last minute changes on teams he has in early in the day on Selection Sunday and then nonsensical explanations.

not that he's being fed those to enhance credibility or anything...